Editor’s note: Too many letters, not enough space. So these are being posted on the blog:
Cleary is the clear choice
I fear that Ryan Sundberg has a few, large financial backers of his campaign while Cleary has raised less money from a significantly larger and far more diverse portion of the local population.
Most of Sundberg’s money has come from a small group of Eureka developers and a Sonoma County water lobbyist. I do not claim to understand why but this pattern has always signaled an attempt to position a politician in power to serve a few wealthy, affluent special interest groups.
I do not know Mr. Sundberg but assume he is a good person. His website tells me he is going to “create living-wage employment with benefits.. and affordable housing”.
Mr. Sundberg is a sole insurance agent whom works out of his aunts office and a member of the Cher-ae Heights Rancheria Council. He has no employees, never made payroll and certainly never provided any benefits to his employees.
He does have close, active and direct involvement with the Cher-Ae Heights tribe and most predominantly their Casino through his Council seat. He also tells us that he will not relinquish his seat and active role with the Rancheria and Casino. Does this sounds like equal and fair representation to you?
Patrick Cleary has a proven track record of turning numerous business around, some are large employers including the Co-op and 4 local radio stations that I personally witnessed him save with hard work, persistence and incredibly ingenuity.
Without Cleary they would have most certainly gone bankrupt. These are real jobs, benefits, quality of life and prosperity he has proven out to us. While I have seen Patrick involved in numerous community organizations such as economic development, public radio, etc. I have never seen My. Sundberg significantly involved in anything that was not tribal/casino related.
Cleary has a proven track record of saving and creating living wage jobs, local prosperity, opportunity and education. Cleary, based on real merit and action not hollow words is the clear choice for 5th District Supervisor.
Professor of Economics HSU, local Entrepreneur/business owner
Gallegos bungled a rape prosecution
During the last school year, a student at Humboldt State University was raped. The Arcata Police Department investigated the crime and apprehended the rapist, who had left the state of California. The case was handed over to Paul Gallegos, district attorney. For whatever reason, he decided not to prosecute. Detective Martinez from the Arcata Police Department had done an outstanding job in handling the crime. In essence, he did his homework.
Paul Gallegos is again running for office of District Attorney. Personally, I would not vote for him for dog catcher. I strongly encourage you to vote for Allison Jackson, who has a background in crimes of this nature and is more than qualified to enforce the law. Students and the residents in Humboldt County deserve stronger support, representation, and justice in this particular area of the law.
Frank J. Cheek, Educator
I recently read a letter sent in by Mr. Cheek to the Lumberjack to which I must respond.
It is unfortunate that Mr. Cheek, who describes himself as an educator would write such an ill-informed and ignorant post. While Mr. Cheek may support Ms. Jackson, this does not give him or anyone else the right to be so fast and loose with the truth. Mr. Cheek knows nothing about the case of which he writes. Up until today, I would have said that I doubt Ms. Jackson would approve of such an attack so devoid of facts; I was apparently wrong.
I can tell you that I was the handling attorney on the case about which Mr. Cheek writes. Out of respect for the young woman and her privacy I will not write of any of the details. Detective Martinez and I both worked very hard on this case; in the end the young woman, on no uncertain terms, made it clear that she would not cooperate or participate in the prosecution. This was after the case was charged; the suspect in question was extradited and housed in the jail for several weeks. Without her testimony, the People could not proceed and therefore the charges were dismissed.
Mr. Cheek, you sir were not a witness to the events of this alleged crime; nor were you privy to the communications between the young woman and Detective Martinez; nor were you a party to the communications between myself and this young woman. Before you made comment perhaps you should have educated yourself.
To do anything less is an insult to Detective Martinez, APD and the District Attorney’s Office.
Deputy District Attorney
Another parent not for Gallegos
I read a response today sent by Kelly Neel, Deputy District Attorney, regarding a letter sent by Coach Cheek regarding my daughter who was a victim of a serious crime. Please let me introduce myself. My name is Angela Hampton and I am the victim’s mother. This year will mark 30 years for me with the State of California. I have worked directed with District Attorneys’, Administrative Law Judges, Provided Expert Testimony for the State of California, Law Enforcement Agencies, Legislators and Policymakers. I feel pretty qualified on how the “system” operates and I’m not going away anytime too soon.
Ms. Neel may criticize Coach Cheek for being uneducated but I’m not. I commend Coach Cheek’s actions. I know little about him but I do know one thing, he has a strong military, “no nonsense background.” He is pretty “straight up” – something the Humboldt DA Office does not possess!
It is apparent that cases are repeatedly dismissed, charges reduced and where the Humboldt DA Office has gone soft on the serious offenders. It definitely looks like a pattern of behavior that sacrifices justice and lets criminals off with light sentences or no sentences at all. Mr. Gallegos and Kelly Neel couldn’t be further from the truth regarding my daughter’s case. The communication was the poorest that I have encountered in my 30 years of civil service work especially concerning victims of serious crimes.
Deceit to the public should not be tolerated. My daughter and I deserve an answer and deserve the truth. We are still waiting for the truth. On the contrary, my daughter was fully cooperative and still remains fully cooperative regarding the case and she awaits the decision from the Attorney General’s Office. The Attorney General’s Office didn’t accept the case for review for nothing. They were “interested” because something looks wrong.
On July 28, 2010 my daughter filed a complaint with U.S Attorney General Eric Holder and Attorney General Edmund Brown. The case is currently being investigated and pending an answer. The request for the solution from my daughter is to refile the charges against the perpetuator because there was no answer or intelligent reason why the case was dismissed. That doesn’t sound like someone that is “uncooperative.” My daughter even claims, “the perpetuator could have at least gotten community service.”
Here is what I think happened. There was a preliminary hearing in the case and the defendant was held to answer on the charges. Jeremiah Ross conducted the preliminary and the defendant was bound over on July 15th. The court set the rearraignment on the information and not the complaint for July 29th. Then for some unknown reason Ms. Neel scheduled it to be advanced for a dismissal on July 22, 2010 without notifying the victim and the family.
A couple of conversations took place between Kelly and I. First she blamed it on Jeremiah Ross (does he know that), then she tried to blame it on my daughter’s cooperation, then Mr. Gallegos informs my husband and I that there was a third party witness who he refuses to tell us the name.
I challenge both Kelly Neel and Paul Gallegos to the truth. Let me know the day, time and place.
Please call me for additional information or the letter to the Attorney General’s Office. Thank you.